PEBBLE BEACH CO. v. CADDY Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A California resort sued a small UK bed-and-breakfast with the same name. The court found no personal jurisdiction, holding that a passive, non-interactive website, without more, does not constitute the “express aiming” at the forum state required for specific jurisdiction.
Legal Significance: This case clarifies the “express aiming” prong of the Calder effects test for personal jurisdiction. It establishes that a passive, non-interactive website, even one using a famous trademark, is insufficient to establish specific jurisdiction without evidence of “individualized targeting” of the forum.
PEBBLE BEACH CO. v. CADDY Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Pebble Beach Company, a world-renowned golf resort in California, sued Michael Caddy, a resident of the United Kingdom, for trademark infringement. Caddy operates a small, three-room bed-and-breakfast in Barton-on-Sea, England, which is also named “Pebble Beach” due to its location overlooking a pebbly beach. Caddy maintained a website at www.pebblebeach-uk.com to advertise his establishment. The website was purely informational and passive; it described the accommodations, listed rates in pounds sterling, and provided an online inquiry form, but it did not have a system for making or paying for reservations online. Caddy was a dual U.S.-U.K. citizen and had briefly worked in California in the past, giving him knowledge of the plaintiff’s resort. Pebble Beach filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, asserting that Caddy’s use of the name and website constituted tortious conduct aimed at California. Caddy moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a federal court have specific personal jurisdiction over a foreign defendant whose only relevant contact with the forum is the operation of a passive, non-interactive website using a name that is a famous U.S. trademark?
No. The court held that it lacked personal jurisdiction over Caddy because Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Does a federal court have specific personal jurisdiction over a foreign defendant whose only relevant contact with the forum is the operation of a passive, non-interactive website using a name that is a famous U.S. trademark?
Conclusion
This case solidifies the principle that in the Ninth Circuit, personal jurisdiction Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis au
Legal Rule
To establish specific personal jurisdiction under the Calder effects test, a plaintiff Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod t
Legal Analysis
The Ninth Circuit's analysis focused on the first prong of the specific Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A foreign defendant’s operation of a passive, non-interactive website is not,